Islam is the real positive change that you need to change for being a better person or a perfect human being, you can change yourself if you read QURAN, IF YOU DO THAT !! you will change this UMMAH, say I am not A Sunni or Shia, BUT I am just a MUSLIM. Be a walking QURAN among human-being AND GUIDE THEM TO THE RIGHT PATH.

Children at the Victor Street Mosque in Bradford. ‘Prevent creates a
systemic risk of violations of the right to freedom of expression, the
right against discrimination and the right to privacy.’
Photograph: Murdo Macleod for the Guardian The problem of “homegrown” terrorism inspired by Islamic State
is front and centre of the counter-terrorism agenda in western Europe.
In the UK, the government estimates the terrorist threat to be “severe”.
It also estimates that about 850 individuals “of national security
concern” have travelled from the UK to Iraq and Syria since the conflict
there began, and about half of them have returned.
But what is the most effective way for governments to respond to this
threat, without undermining the very values of democracy and freedom
that they claim they want to defend?

In the UK, this debate has focused, particularly over the past year,
on the government’s Prevent programme – which seeks to stop individuals
being drawn into terrorism. Since 2015, the so-called “Prevent duty”
has in effect required teachers, doctors and other frontline
professionals to report individuals at risk of being drawn into violent
and non-violent extremism to the police-led “Channel” support programme.
Is this the correct and proportional response?
A report released today by the Open Society Justice Initiative, Eroding Trust:
The UK’s “Prevent” Counter-Extremism Strategy in Health and Education
says that it is not. Based on legal analysis, case studies and numerous
interviews, we argue that Prevent is not only unjust but also
unproductive.
Prevent’s overly broad definition of extremism – vocal or active
opposition to fundamental British values – creates a systemic risk of
violations of the right to freedom of expression, the right against
discrimination and the right to privacy. Scottish government officials
told me that although the term “British values” was in the Prevent
guidance, they “don’t ever use that phrase” because “it could be
damaging or unhelpful if it endorses a ‘them and us’ mentality”.

Current Time 0:00

/

Duration Time 9:36

Loaded:

Having spoken to more than 80 experts and individuals affected by the
programme, my research found that Prevent was creating a climate of
fear and a chilling effect on free expression. Case studies in the
report describe children in schools being targeted and intimidated under
Prevent for expressing political views. In UK universities – considered
by many to be bastions of academic freedom – Prevent is apparently
leading to the cancellation of conferences and debates about
Islamophobia, and students are being targeted for reading course
materials on terrorism.

Advertisement

Conversations
about terrorism are being driven underground, where they are less
likely to be challenged. In healthcare facilities, doctors fear that
their obligation to report patients to the authorities is in conflict
with their duty of confidentiality and will undermine the doctor-patient
relationship. One psychologist quoted in the report says, “we are being
encouraged to police thought crimes and political opinions” and
describes another psychologist being fed questions by Prevent officers
to ask her patient.
For these reasons, we are calling for the repeal of the Prevent duty
in health and education so that frontline professionals can be free to
get on with their jobs and apply their professional judgment to respond
appropriately to cases that genuinely warrant intervention.
A particularly troubling case study in the report describes an
organisation collecting names and sensitive political information for
the Home Office – apparently under Prevent, and apparently without
informed consent – from nine- and 10-year-old children from a
predominantly Muslim area. A questionnaire distributed to the children
to elicit their opinions is included in the report.
It asked whether they agreed or disagreed with statements such as: “I
think most people respect my race or religion”; “People should be free
to say what they like, even if it offends others”; “People from a
different race, religion or community are just as good as people like
me”; and “Women are just as good as men at work”. It also asked the
children how much they trusted people of their race or religion, people
of another race or religion, school teachers, police officers,
journalists and the UK government. Would these children have been
targeted in this manner had they not been predominantly Muslim?

In a climate of intense anti-Muslim sentiment, the report argues,
Prevent gives frontline professionals broad discretion to act on their
conscious and unconscious biases. The report notes that the government’s
own figures show that in the past, 80% of referrals to the police-led Channel programme were rejected. Since the statutory “Prevent duty” took effect in 2015, the number of referrals to Channel has skyrocketed. The government’s annual report on Contest, its counterterrorism strategy,
notes that “during 2015, there were several thousand referrals to
Channel; around 15% of these were linked to far-right extremism, and
around 70% linked to Islamist-related extremism”; but that of those
referred, only “several hundred” were provided with support in 2015.
This suggests that a significant number of individuals were wrongly
referred.

Advertisement

Unsurprisingly,
Prevent is alienating many law-abiding Muslims wrongly targeted and
causing them to question their place in British society. David Anderson
QC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, observed in his testimony before parliament’s home affairs select committee
that “Prevent has become a more significant source of grievance in
affected communities than the police and ministerial powers … that are
exercised under the Pursue strand of the Contest strategy”. Prevent’s
alienating effect in turn undermines the ability of law enforcement
officials to elicit the cooperation of Muslim communities for countering
future terrorist attacks.
There are parallels here with another policing issue affecting
minority communities: the disproportionate use of stop and search. In
2014, Theresa May, then home secretary, told parliament:
“Nobody wins when stop and search is misapplied. It is a waste of
police time. It is unfair, especially to young, black men. It is bad for
public confidence in the police.” Surely the prime minister’s words are
also true for Prevent when it is misapplied to Muslims?
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/19/terror-prevent-muslims-police-terrorist-attacks

Post a Comment

Featured Post

Welcome

ABOUT US

About the Organization
Lifeline Somalia initiative is an organization composed of young leaders of Somali origin, third and fourth generation born and living in diasporas, and those who migrated and settled in the west and Somali intellectuals men and women.. LSI is located in Eastland's part of Nairobi.
Who decided to come up with unique peace forum to open new chapter in the history of Somalia free from tribalism and break all tribal barriers.
LSI was started to meet the social needs of the young people living in the diasporas and those who are living in areas wholly affected by civil war and both physical and natural causes to negative effects on human lives.
Lifeline Somalia initiative acts as a channel through which the governments and other organizations (local and international) can reach the communities for development and participation in Nation building as well as conducting Awareness concerning alarming issues like HIV/AIDS pandemic, violence, Child abuse and labor, Human rights, Terrorism and Millennium Development goals.